Skip to main content

tv   News Nation  MSNBC  January 8, 2014 11:00am-12:01pm PST

11:00 am
security measures and as you know because we've discussed this a lot at the end of last year, we have been committed to looking for ways to provide photographers access to the white house and the president and providing photo opportunity today was part of that commitment, fulfilling that commitment and, you know, again, i don't think anybody who has covered us or knows the president and the vice president, knows how this white house functions has any doubt about the president's faith in vice president biden as an adviser and counselor. so we don't need to reinforce that. it's a fact. >> the timing of the photo was just coincidence then? >> it was coincidence. he has a weekly lunch. >> it's not normally on camera. >> exactly. we have as you can ask our friends in the world of photography here, debate and discussion with them about how
11:01 am
we can better improve access for them. this has been something that they've raised with us in the past. so you guys can decide for yourself. the president greatly values the counsel of the vice president on matters foreign and domestic. >> what would you think if you were sitting here, jay? the timing was a coincidence? obviously we had back and forth about this. >> again, i can just tell you what the facts are. you can decide for yourselves what you want to believe. >> we're talking about former advisers, yesterday it was said that he probably would back the keystone pipeline he was still advising president. what weight would that endorsement carry with the president as he considers this issue going forward? >> i haven't discussed that report with the president. the process as you know is
11:02 am
ongoing. the state department in keeping with tradition of previous administrations for many years. i don't have an update on that. that's it? >> that's it. >> looking at the president's schedule today, i think i counted no fewer than four meetings on the public schedule with vice president biden. anything i should read into that? >> i trust you, john, and others that covered this white house have look at scheduled before and -- >> there you have it. white house press secretary jay carney talking about what some folks in this country are talking about today. we're getting the first on-camera response to that new memoir from former defense secretary robert gates. tough assertions made in that new memoir. the book titled "duty" is not out until next week but making waves in washington after e excerpts were released. the president grew frustrated about the war in afghanistan.
11:03 am
gates writes "as i sat there, i thought the president doesn't trust his commander. doesn't believe in his own tragedy and doesn't consider this war to be his. for him it's all about getting out." gates also calls the obama white house "by far the most centralized and controlling in national security of any i had seen since richard nixon and henry kissinger ruled the roost." mixed reaction that depend on "views of the iraq and afghanistan wars and this president." republicans senator john mccain and lindsey graham brought up the book while talking about the recent resurgence of al qaeda in iraq. >> i blame obama and biden for not listening to their commanders rejecting sound advice and bob gates talks about that in his book about how military commanders were overruled by the political people in the white house. >> jay carney getting more questions now about the book.
11:04 am
let's take a listen. >> and then leaves office and makes a decision about how they'll talk or write about that experience and when. and that's everybody's decision to make for himself or herself. i would simply say the president asked secretary gates, robert gates, to stay on as secretary of defense and he appreciates the service that he gave to this administration, to this president, and very much valued the role he played in this administration and the advice he gave. for other issues, i'll leave it to other folks to decide because everyone makes their own decision in that circumstance. some people write books. some people don't. we're focused on, you know, all of the things that we need to work on in 2014, both national security matters, domestic matters, economic matters, matters of providing essential
11:05 am
emergency assistance to the unemployed and that's what consumes our days. >> at his farewell, the president said of secretary grates quite simply, he's one of the nation's finest public servants. anything in this confidential information that he's put out and judgments that he's made about the president and vice president that causes the president to reconsider that? >> i think i answered part of that just now in terms of how the decision folks make when they leave administrations and that's true of this or any other previous administration. what matters most to the president is the service that his top advisers give him as president and secretary gates provided service to this administration and the previous administrations and the president is greatly appreciative of that.
11:06 am
and, i think it's important to note because you see headlines and you see discrete excerpts that tell a story or one story or seem to say one thing but since a lot of what we're talking about here has to do with the policy review over afghanistan and pakistan, it's important to remember -- not remember, maybe some of you haven't seen this, it's been noted in some of the press reports that regarding that policy debate in his book, secretary gates said "obama was much criticized by conservatives and hawkish commentators for announcing the troop surge in afghanistan would be drawn down in july of 2011 and that all u.s. combat boots would be withdrawn and all responsibility for security transferred to the afghans by the end of itary the
11:07 am
grumbling about the limits he placed on troops. i believe obama was right in each of these decisions." that's from the book. that's secretary gates' published opinion on these matters. were these substantial, rich discussions? absolutely. because the policy was so important. and it was much reported on at the time that there were differing views about how we should move forward with our policy toward afghanistan and pakistan so some of the disagreements or differing views reporting here is not different than what we've seen in the past. >> jay, these are some explosive statements that he has made about the president. this is not some outside critic. this was one of his most important if not most important national security advisers. the guy he chose to keep on to run the pentagon. he says that there was a suspicion and distrust of senior
11:08 am
military officers by senior white house officials including the president and the vice president and this became a big problem for him. what do you say -- >> again, i think you have to take the full picture here, john. i would say on that matter, i think the american people expect that their commander in chief listen to all of his adviser, civilian and military when it comes to discussions and debates about matters of war and peace and decisions that affect the lives of our men and women in uniform and that's how it should be. the president, the vice president, everyone in this building who has ever served and worked on these matters has enormous respect for our men and women in uniform and that includes all of the president's top senior military advisers. on policy issues, the president absolutely wants tough questions
11:09 am
asked. on matters of national security, he wants in these discussions and debates, both his military and his civilian advisers to be blunt and candid about their views and to backup their assessments. that's what i think you would expect and want in the kinds of discussions that are held and have been held in previous administrations and previous white houses hopefully over when these fateful decisions have to be made. >> was gates wrong when he said the president didn't believe in his own afghanistan policy? >> i think it is absolutely the case as many have reported that it is well known that the president is committed to the mission of defeating al qaeda
11:10 am
while making sure we have a clear path for winding down the war which will end this year. these are not separate issues. mission and policy included both ramping up and refocusing our mission on al qaeda as well as making sure we had a policy in place that would wind down that war because a war without end was not what the president believed was the right policy. there were debates about this. so the president believes thoroughly in the mission. he knows it's difficult but he believes that our men and women in uniform as well as those civilians in afghanistan and others who are working on this issue have admirably fiulfilled that mission and they do so today.
11:11 am
>> can you comment on the inference that secretary gates has in the book that both secretary clinton and president obama admitted their opposition to the iraq surge and that politics played a role in their opposition to the iraq surge. there was an inference that the president was engaging in this discussion. >> what i don't understand about that is anybody who has covered barack obama going all of the way back to his race for the senate knows that he was opposed to the iraq war. that was his view running for the senate. his view as senator. view as candidate for the presidency. so it would be entirely inconsistent for him not to hold the position that he held with regards to the surge. i don't know what conversation that reverse to. it doesn't track based on what i know and what everybody here knows about the president's positions through the years going back to 2002 on these matters. >> you have a very real deadline
11:12 am
coming up. the government having to make a decision to keep troops what size of force, if any, is there after 2014. is there concern by the president that some of the revelations about the president's personal views of karzai for instance is going to make this more difficult? >> no. look, i think the issues on the table here have to do with the need for the afghan government to sign the bilateral security agreement as was envisioned by president karzai and others and which is a product of good faith negotiation and in order for the united states and our allies to plan for a post-2014 mission that would have a military component to it focused on
11:13 am
counterterrorism and support and training for afghan troops, we need this agreement signed promptly. this is a matter of weeks and not months. >> you're not concerned that this book creates more tension with karzai? >> i think that -- we have direct and regular communications both from washington and our embassy in kabul with president karzai and his government and i think these matters are well far along the road. i don't anticipate that. he and his government understands our views and our position and the reasoning behind it and we urge prompt action on signing the bsa. >> was secretary gates' characterization of the president's views of karzai accurate? >> i think president obama addre
11:14 am
addressed our policy toward afghanistan and our relationship with president karzai. that government, president karzai, obviously it's a challenging situation every day for them and we work with them every day both through our military and civilian force there to help them prepare for this transition and to help them in the military way prepare for the increased responsibility for security that comes with it. that has been a clear focus of the mission that the president established after the review of our policy there. >> the description was pretty personal. the president can't stand karzai. >> i wouldn't necessarily agree -- i wouldn't agree with that. i think the issues here are not about personalities, they're about policies. and the decisions the president makes about sending and keeping
11:15 am
military forces, american men and women in uniform in afghanistan have to do with u.s. national security interests and not those kinds of issues. and that's why the signing of the bsa is so important for us and nato allies to move forward. >> going back to biden, this is the second book in three months where the president has basically in some way you guys have come out and had to sort of defend, buck up, whatever you want to describe it when it comes to joe biden place. why do you think it is that biden has been written about negatively in a couple of these books? >> i don't know that i would agree with that assessment. when asked the president and others reassert the fundamental fact here is that vice president biden is a key adviser on national security matters and domestic policy matters and other matters for this president. the president greatly values the
11:16 am
counsel he provides. that's just a fact. it's a fact known to everyone in this building every day. >> why do insiders portray him in these books in a negative light? >> i think it comes to debates internally, the vice president is one member and continues to be one member of that team of rivals. this is not somebody who the president chose to be someone who simply affirms what others are thinking. the vice president has a lot of experience. the vice president has done a lot of work on a lot of very complex issues including afghanistan and iraq, including a number of domestic policy issues and he plays an important role in the discussions here and that role includes expressing an opinion that isn't always agreed to by everybody in the room. if it were, it wouldn't be what the president wanted.
11:17 am
let me move up and back. cheryl. >> different subject all together. this morning at the u.s. chamber tom donohue was talking about the state of business. he said one of business' biggest concerns right now is overregulation. he accuses the administration of regulatory overreach. is the president satisfied with the level of regulation on businesses? >> let me say a couple of things about that. the president does not believe that we have to choose between protecting the health -- >> there you have it. white house press secretary jay carney talking about the book, talking about what so many folks are talking about on this wednesday afternoon. white house correspondent kristen walker joins me now. i was waiting for jay carney to say this isn't true about any aspect of what was said in the
11:18 am
book. when asked whether the president had lost faith in his own strategy in afghanistan, he didn't say that wasn't totally on true. it's going to be interesting to see how the white house continues to handle what's undoubtedly going to be more fallout from this over the next few days. >> reporter: right. that's an interesting point, craig. i think one of the things that the white house is focusing on right now is to say that the book to some extent some of the allegations that were leveled are consistent with president obama's sort of robust debate that he had about his policy toward afghanistan. you heard him underscore that when he was fielding questions about whether or not the president actually believed in his own afghanistan policy. carney making the point that, look, there was no secret that there were a number of different viewpoints. the president welcomed those viewpoints. and that was something that was discussed at the time. you did hear him say, look, he believes in the policy moving forward. he wants to draw down the
11:19 am
troops. i think the big question, craig, is one you heard chuck ask which is what will the impact be moving forward? of course they are encouraging and pressing karzai to sign that bca agreement. that hasn't happened yet. karzai has not signed it. has put a number of demands on the table saying he won't sign it until he gets those demands and of course in the book gates writes that president obama can't stand karzai. i think that you heard chuck ask there, will that have any impact on the afghanistan policy moving forward? that's a big question mark that remains to be seen. >> i'll come back to you in just a second. let me pose that question to you. you have covered this part of the world. this bilateral agreement supposed to be signed in the next few months. what do revelations like this do for negotiations like that? >> well, the negotiations and terms of the agreement have been spelled out. it's now about politics. why this is an important revelation from the gates book is that it shows that personality does matter in these negotiations. what we're seeing right now is
11:20 am
president hamid karzai holding up an agreement for the u.s. he wants to wait closer to his country's elections in april. he doesn't want to pass this agreement and doesn't want the responsibility of giving the americans a green light to do what they want in his country and secure more concessions from the united states. had he been a president that had a very good personal relationship with president obama, this would have probably been signed a long time ago. >> kristen, today the white house apparently gave access to reporters, to photographers, the president has this weekly lunch with vice president biden. we heard jay carney there insisting that it just so happened to be coincidence that this was one of the rare occasions where a photo was provided. what do we make of that? is that purely damage control? >> reporter: well, look, i think that -- i've been talking to white house officials about this all morning long. what they have been telling me is consistent with what you heard carney say. they say, look, opening up this
11:21 am
lunch had nothing to do with the gates book. it was merely because the media has been pressing for more access, which is true. we have been pressing for more access. certainly the timing is interesting though, craig. just to give some context in all of the time that i've been here at the white house, reporters, photographers, have never been allowed into that weekly lunch that president obama has with his vice president. so this is certainly new. and then privately white house officials say, look, we're going to defend vice president biden right now. we're going to defend the president right now. that is the right thing to do. they believe of course in the wake of these allegations that have been leveled by gates and it's not just with that photo-op. whatever way you want to look at it, craig. publicly, they've been quite clear. they disagree with what gates says. it was said yesterday the president disagrees with secretary gates' assertions. joe biden has been one of the leading statesman of his time.
11:22 am
they've been pushing back against this publicly however you want to view that photo-op at lunch certainly it was unique. certainly you could argue that the implications are to do damage control mode. but the white house saying, look, it's just to give the media more access but not denying they're going to defend the vice president. >> timing undeniably curious. thank you. new developments today in a growing political controversy surrounding chris christie's administration. newly released e-mails show christie's office was closely involved with the closures last fall of local access lanes to the country's busiest bridge and that the closings may have been politically motivated. there was total gridlock in one town including on the first day of school. the mayor of ft. lee, a
11:23 am
democrat, who declined to endorse christie's re-election. weeks before the closings, christie's chief of staff wrote to the port authority aid. time for traffic troubles in ft. lee. to which the reply is got it. governor christie stated that his staff had nothing to do with those lane closures and they were done as part of a traffic study. we should note here that msnbc has contacted christie's office for comment. we have not heard back from that office just yet. nbc news senior political editor mark murray is here. mark, is this governor christie's first legitimate scand scandal? >> this is tough news for him. it goes to a couple of things. one on credibility issue. as you just mentioned, over the last several weeks now he said there's no kind of political retribution involved. this was just something else. these e-mails show a different
11:24 am
story. it becomes incumbent on the governor to address that and explain what he knows and what those e-mails actually represent. the other thing that's troubling for governor christie, craig, is that there is a lot of talk about 2016. if he decides to run for the presidency and this story is not good news. it kind of creates a perception, a fair or not, of chris christie being a bully and punishing political adversaries and political payback is nothing new in politics one bit. it is something entirely different when you see these types of e-mails that are kind of saying let's close down the -- let's make things difficult for the residents of our state. >> we've already got a statement from the dnc, congresswoman debbie wasserman-schultz saying these revelations indicate what we've come to expect from governor christie when people oppose him. he exacts retribution.
11:25 am
he belittles and when anyone dares to look into his administration, he bullies and attacks. you just alluded to it there. there is of course this perception out there that chris christie is in fact a big bully. when stories like this emerge that obviously plays into those perceptions. can we expect the pile on to start here soon from other republican 2016 presidential want to bes? >> it's early. no one officially announced for the presidency. political reporters like me are focused on midterm elections that are happening this year. you do reach the negative narrative that a particular candidate has and any person running for office presidentially for the presidency and opposition party hopes you step into it and democrats are going after what they see as chris christie being a bully. chris christie and his folks would argue that's overblown.
11:26 am
it's incumbent upon the governor to address these e-mails. we have not heard from his office or heard from the governor and we're waiting to hear what he has to say on this. >> mark murray, thank you. another heart wrenching fight and more ethical questions in the debate over life support from texas where a woman is being kept alive against her wishes because she's pregnant. her father says she's being used as a "host of a fetus." we'll tell you what the hospital is saying. politics of poverty. >> clearly the big government ideas of the past need to be improved and aren't working. >> 50 years after lbj declared a war on poverty, duelling events claiming their version will help americans still living in poverty. we'll talk to south carolina congressman jim clyburn after the break. aflac! got 'em. ♪
11:27 am
yeah, he's clean, boss. now listen to me, duck. i have an associate that met with, uh, an unfortunate accident. while he's been incapacitated, somebody's been paying him cash. now, is this your doing? aflac? now, if i met with some such accident, would aflac pay me? ♪ nice. this is your stop. [ male announcer ] find out what aflac can do for you and your family... aflac? [ male announcer ] her long day of pick ups and drop offs begins with arthritis pain... and a choice. take up to 6 tylenol in a day or just 2 aleve for all day relief. all aboard. ♪
11:28 am
11:29 am
that would be my daughter -- hi dad. she's a dietitian. and back when i wasn't eating right, she got me drinking boost. it's got a great taste, and it helps give me the nutrition i was missing. helping me stay more like me. [ female announcer ] boost complete nutritional drink has 26 essential vitamins and minerals, including calcium and vitamin d to support strong bones and 10 grams of protein to help maintain muscle. all with a delicious taste. grandpa! [ female announcer ] stay strong, stay active with boost.
11:30 am
right now in texas, the family of a pregnant woman declared brain dead is fighting to take her off life support. she suffered a pulmonary emboli embolism. she never wanted to be on life support if there was no chance for recovery. but she's 14 weeks pregnant. "the new york times" reports texas is one of more than two dozen states that have laws preventing pregnant women from being taken off life support. now, four weeks later, she remains on life support. the fetus is in its 20th week of development. her mother said that doctors had told her they would make a decision about what to do with the fetus as it reached 22 to 24 weeks. her father says "all we want is to let her rest, to let her go to sleep. what they are doing serves no purpose." joining me now is an msnbc
11:31 am
contributor and we should note here for purposes of beginning of this conversation at least, an attorney. let's start there, michael. what legal recourse does this family have? >> it's interesting because there's a split of authority on this, craig. you have texas law being one of you referenced more than two dozen states. 12 of those states are very restrictive and they look at 20 weeks the same they would 24 and beyond which is beyond the point of viability. this woman has a constitutional right to an abortion. where you look at a first tri-me tri-metri trimester pregnancy. the longer the clock ticks, the
11:32 am
more complicated this begins because when she reaches -- when that pregnancy reaches a point of viability, then the whole picture changes. >> we should note here that the hospital has said that they are simply following the law. there have been advocates who said that depends on your interpretation of the law. one thing is clear though. according to texas law regarding pregnant patients, "a person may not withdraw or withhold life sustaining treatment under this subchapter from a pregnant patient" but the law does not require the state of texas to pick up the bill when the family has to keep her alive. is that correct? >> that's correct. we should say that she's brain dead according to the medical practitioners. that's what's been reported in the "times" and elsewhere and in the eyes of the law, brain death and death are synonymous. one and the same even if she maintains bodily functions. if she's brain dead for all practical purposes unfortunately she has expired.
11:33 am
so they look at this case and say they are rendering treatment to a dead woman. >> we just of course had that debate over jahi mcmath in california. it seems as if we may be on the cusp of another debate in this country over the right to live and the right to die, no? >> we might. craig, the takeaway as far as i'm concerned and i say this day in and day out, articulate your wishes. make sure if you should ever end up in a case like this that people aren't sitting on television thereafter questioning what your desires were. make it known. put it in writing. be sure your family is on notice of how you would like your end of life plan to be carried out. >> real quickly, would a dnr order here have been sufficient? >> in a case like this, she's dead essentially. i don't know that that order would really have much practical effect whatsoever. the fact of the matter is that
11:34 am
when we get four more weeks down the road, all of a sudden that fetus has rights that it doesn't have today and then the dynamic changes. today i believe mom's wish gets carried out. in four week's time because of roe versus wade, i would come to a different conclusion. >> we'll follow this story. thank you so much for your insight. still ahead here, outrage after the obama police union posts an atrocious video on its website of a toddler being encouraged to say some pretty nasty things. the group claims that it had an obligation to educate people about what it calls the "thug cycle." we'll have some reaction from one of the local organizations calling the union out. ♪ wow...look at you. i've always tried to give it my best shot. these days i'm living with a higher risk of stroke due to afib, a type of irregular heartbeat, not caused by a heart valve problem. at first, i took warfarin, but i wondered, "could i up my game?"
11:35 am
my doctor told me about eliquis. and three important reasons to take eliquis instead. one, in a clinical trial, eliquis was proven to reduce the risk of stroke better than warfarin. two, eliquis had less major bleeding than warfarin. and three... unlike warfarin, there's no routine blood testing. [ male announcer ] don't stop taking eliquis unless your doctor tells you to, as stopping increases your risk of having a stroke. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily and it may take longer than usual for any bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. i've got three important reasons to up my game with eliquis. [ male announcer ] ask your doctor today if eliquis is right for you.
11:36 am
open to innovation. open to ambition. open to bold ideas. that's why new york has a new plan -- dozens of tax free zones all across the state. move here, expand here, or start a new business here and pay no taxes for ten years... we're new york. if there's something that creates more jobs, and grows more businesses... we're open to it. start a tax-free business at humans -- we are beautifully imperfect creatures, living in an imperfect world. that's why liberty mutual insurance has your back, offering exclusive products like optional better car replacement, where, if your car is totaled, we give you the money to buy one a model year newer. call... and ask an insurance expert about all our benefits today,
11:37 am
like our 24/7 support and service, because at liberty mutual insurance, we believe our customers do their best out there in the world, so we do everything we can to be there for them when they need us. plus, you could save hundreds when you switch -- up to $423. call... today. liberty mutual insurance. responsibility. what's your policy? today marks 50 years since president lyndon johnson declared war on poverty in his first state of the union address.
11:38 am
>> this administration today here and now declares unconditional war on poverty in america. it will not be a short or easy struggle. no single weapon or strategy will suffice but we shall not rest until that war is won. >> today both republicans and democrats marked the anniversary with separate news conferences. joining the democrats, president johnson's eldest daughter. >> it was a moral issue and the congress saw it as such. i want to congratulate the congress because it was a bipartisan vote. >> today republicans insisted there needs to be a new strategy in the war on poverty. >> clearly the big government ideas of the past need to be improved and aren't working to the extent that they should.
11:39 am
we have a moral obligation to break the mold. rethink the status quo and do a better job for vulnerable families and those individuals in this country. >> so where do we stand in the war on poverty right now? the latest numbers from the census bureau show 15% of all americans still live below the poverty line. despite that, the ranks of the poor have actually grown from 36 million in 1964 to more than 46 million in 2012. the number of african-americans below the poverty line has been slashed from nearly 42% in 1966 but still sits at more than 27% thanks to medicaid, medicare, americans over 65 have seen their poverty rate plummet. for more than 28% down to 9%. for kids under 18, from 17.6% to nearly 22% since the war on poverty was declared.
11:40 am
joining me live now, congressman jim clyburn from south carolina. congressman, first of all, this is senator marco rubio scheduled to be speaking at this hour. he's going to talk about reforming certain anti-poverty programs. he gave a preview over the weekend. take a listen to what he said. >> after 50 years, isn't it time to declare big government's war on poverty a failure? instead of continuing to borrow and spend trillions of dollars on government programs that don't work, what our nation needs is a real agenda that helps people acquire the skills they need to lift themselves out of poverty and to pursue the american dream. >> congressman, let's start there. do you agree at all that the war on poverty itself has been an abject failure? >> absolutely not. thank you so much for having me, craig. the fact of the matter is you mentioned that 15% now when it was 19% at the time president johnson made his speech. the fact of the matter is check
11:41 am
1973. nine years after we initiated that war on poverty, it dropped to 11%. it has gone up since then simply because we lost our will to continue to fight the war. president johnson told us from the beginning that it will be long and it wouldn't be easy. the fact of the matter is the moment you start quitting, the moment you face obstacles, you aren't losing, you're just quitting. we were absolutely winning the war on poverty. i can show you places in south carolina and families like mine that is proof of that. >> why do you think we stopped the fight? what was behind it? >> elections. every time you have an election. when ronald reagan started mimicking the welfare stuff, that's the kind of stuff that
11:42 am
will get you a sound bite and maybe even elected. it won't solve problems. that's what happened to us. people decided they wanted to put their resources on something else. remember, at the same time we were fighting this war we were also dealing with civil rights issues. voting rights. same stuff we're fighting today. after president johnson's speech in 1964, we got voting rights act in 1965. one of the ways to fight poverty is empower poor people to go to the polls and get registered and speak for themselves. >> we heard as i indicated we'll hear from senator rubio later. today we heard from eric cantor and we also expect to hear from congressman paul ryan in an interview at some point today or
11:43 am
tomorrow. what do you make of a concerted effort on the part of republicans to start talking about poverty? what's behind it? >> well, i would hope that they see as most of us see that we need to direct our resources into these persistent poverty communities. that's why congressional black caucus has been calling for for some time now for targeted spending in these persistent poverty areas. we believe the formula we have been advocating of 10, 20, 30, is something we sphould put through the government. if we were to begin to do that as we did in the so-called stimulus bill when we directed development into these
11:44 am
communities, communities, people went back to work. these communities got water and sewage roads and bridges they never thought they would get. that's why we have been advocating targeted spending and putting money into poverty communities and we'll see a furtherance of a drop in poverty. >> south carolina congressman jim clyburn. always good to see you. >> thank you so much for having me. >> let's talk about this video. there's a video that's been posted online by the omaha police officers association. it's sparking a great deal of controversy and outrage. the video which the police union pulled from a local thug's facebook page shows a black toddler in diapers using very profane language while adults in the background are egging him on to curse, say all kinds of crazy things. the police union wrote on its
11:45 am
website though the criminal showed no criminal behavior it was posted because it shows "the terrible cycle of violence and thuggery that some young innocent children find themselves helplessly trapped in." the executive director of black men united of omaha say the police union crossed the line by posting that video and called their decision divisive. the president of the group disagrees and says they do not intend to take it down. willie hamilton joins us now via skype and also with us nationally recognized educator, dr. steve perry. first of all, i should note for our viewers who are watching and listening that the language on the video is so offensive that we've chosen not to play any of the sound here. we did reach out to the president of omaha police officers association and he told us the organization just wanted to display some of the serious problems faced by children in that community. much of the criticism comes from the implication that this child
11:46 am
will grow up to be a violent thug based on what we see and what we hear. is there a racial issue at work here? >> absolutely. for anyone to say that a 2-year-old who has not lived a full life is going to be a thug because of this video is not on this land of thinking. if you had a father that was a murderer, that would mean your child would be a murderer. if your mama was a prostitute, that means you'll become a prostitute? to put that label on a 2 year old before that 2 year old has reached 18 to me is insensitive. at the least and racist at the most. >> you would concede that parents who are watching and in the background who are egging the child on to say some pretty despicable things, i mean, you would concede that kid might not
11:47 am
have as great of a shot at success as other kids that grow up in stable households, no? >> i would agree with that. this was a teachable moment. why didn't omaha police department who knew this individual was a "thug" reach out to community members that could have reached out to that family and had intervention to be able to prevent that type of behavior in the future. the fact of the matter is none of that took place. that's why i feel the way i did. that was a teachable moment. we have a distrust factor when it comes to the police department and our community. why would you do this that will incite more so. >> this is a teachable moment or a video that's purely divisive? >> i thought it was a teachable moment but the union decided to position this video such that it couldn't be a teachable moment. it could only be divisive.
11:48 am
sadly what's happening is we are not focusing on the horrible circumstances under which this child is at any point in his life being raised. we're now focusing on the positioning of the video opposeded to what was really an opportunity to bring some issues to the fore. omaha is one of the more dangerous communities in the country depending on which data you look at in terms of crime statistics. this is bludgeoning the community over the head. they know that it's dangerous there. this is not the police department. this is the police union. if the union wanted to engage the community in a meaningful discussion, this is not the way to do it at all. >> we should say the police passed this video onto authorities at child services. dr. perry, sounds like you have seen this video in its entirety. do you think based on what you've seen that this constitutes abuse? >> i actually think that it does push very closely to abuse. i wish i could tell you that was the first time i ever seen anything like this.
11:49 am
unfortunately what's happening is there's this bad behavior we seem to find funny. i don't know if it's the internet or instant for celebrity but we seem to have lost our utter and as a result we're just drifting. the black community is a community that needs someone to throw its hand on the shoulder and say enough is enough. we have to do better than this. >> and then to tape it and put it on the internet defies all logic. i wish we had more time. willie hamilton, steve perry, appreciate you. we'll be right back. nts the col. i have the flu, i took medicine but i still have symptoms. [ sneeze ] [ male announcer ] truth is not all flu products treat all your symptoms. what? [ male announcer ] nope, they don't have an antihistamine. really? [ male announcer ] really. [ dog whine ] but alka-seltzer plus severe cold and flu speeds relief to these eight symptoms. [ breath of relief ] thanks. [ male announcer ] you're welcome. ready? go. get it! [ male announcer ] can't find theraflu, try alka-seltzer plus
11:50 am
for fast liquid cold and flu relief. i've got a nice long life ahead. big plans. so when i found out medicare doesn't pay all my medical expenses, i got a medicare supplement insurance plan. [ male announcer ] if you're eligible for medicare, you may know it only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. call now and find out about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, it could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. call now to request your free decision guide. i've been with my doctor for 12 years. now i know i'll be able to stick with him. [ male announcer ] you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. plus, there are no networks, and virtually no referrals needed. see why millions of people have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp. don't wait. call now.
11:51 am
it's hard to describe, because you have a numbness, but yet you have the pain like thousands of needles sticking in your foot. it was progressively getting worse, and at that point i knew i had to do something. once i started taking the lyrica the pain started subsiding. [ male announcer ] it's known that diabetes damages nerves. lyrica is fda approved to treat diabetic nerve pain. lyrica is not for everyone. it may cause serious allergic reactions or suicidal thoughts or actions. tell your doctor right away if you have these, new or worsening depression, or unusual changes in mood or behavior. or swelling, trouble breathing, rash, hives, blisters, changes in eyesight including blurry vision, muscle pain with fever, tired feeling, or skin sores from diabetes. common side effects are dizziness, sleepiness, weight gain and swelling of hands, legs and feet. don't drink alcohol while taking lyrica. don't drive or use machinery until you know how lyrica affects you. those who have had a drug or alcohol problem may be more likely to misuse lyrica. ask your doctor about lyrica today.
11:52 am
it's specific treatment for diabetic nerve pain. the annual consumer electronic show in las vegas. a week-long event is under way right now. it's the show place for the latest in high tech gear. this is where industry insiders get their first look at the coolest and smartest products of the future and this year one of the big themes of the show involves the latest trend in high definition television.
11:53 am
it's called 4k technology. it's capable of showing video at a resolution four times higher than standard hd. really cool for consumers. not really cool for people on television for a living. the big question is, what can you watch on it though? joining me from vegas, senior editor, we have a content sharing partnership. it feels like we've been down this road before with 3-d televisions which never really quite took off. what do you think of 4k? i think it is real and these sets are getting much cheaper. a year ago they were tens of thousands of dollars. now they're thousands of dollars. you can get a very small 4k monitor for 700 bucks right now. over time the cost will come down enough and people will buy them whether or not there are stuff to watch on them. it's not like watching a 3-d set
11:54 am
where you had to stick on glasses and embarrass yourself and convince your wife and kids it's a good thing to do. you'll have a nice picture. the real issue is what you can watch on those sets. >> what will you watch on those sets and how clear of a picture are we talking about here? >> i'm the wrong guy to ask about the clarity of the picture because i bought my first tv set ever last year which is a plasma. they look great. not a lot to watch on them right now. netflix has a handful of shows. the next season of house of cards will be in 4k. old seasons of "breaking bad" in 4k and they bought nature documentaries to show how great it looks. it's conceptual in branding right now. as it shows up in people's homes, folks who deliver web video are going to start making this stuff available in 4k. two or three years out before it is mainstream. >> really quickly while i have
11:55 am
you here. we've been told for years that web tv is coming to our homes. why has that not happened in mass yet? >> it doesn't happen right now because of the way the tv industry works right now makes a lot of money for guys that sell cable tv packages and for the networks themselves. it's hard to sort of take the programming people want to watch and break it up into smaller chunks and deliver it over the web. that said, people will try that again this year. sony says they'll do it this year. >> peter, thank you. time now for the "news nation" gut check. earlier in our broadcast we told you about the texas woman who has been declared brain dead but her family is being forced to keep her on life support. that's because she was 14 weeks pregnant when she suffered a pulmonary embolism and texas law prevents a pregnant woman from being removed from life support. she made it clear she never wanted to be on life support if there was no chance of recovery. what does your gut tell you? do you believe that texas should
11:56 am
honor her wishes and take her off life support? you can go to "the cycle" is up next. [ male announcer ] this is george. the day building a play set begins with a surprise twinge of back pain... and a choice. take up to 4 advil in a day or 2 aleve for all day relief. [ male announcer ] that's handy. ♪
11:57 am
11:58 am
this is the creamy chicken corn chowder.
11:59 am
i mean, look at it. so indulgent. did i tell you i am on the... [ both ] chicken pot pie diet! me too! [ male announcer ] so indulgent, you'll never believe they're light. 100-calorie progresso light soups. flood gates. charged with keeping america's secrets. these days the old saying holds true. secrets don't make friends as jay carney just learned the hard way. enough already. the polar express is making a u-turn back to canada. with that said, we'll make our reporters suffer one more day in frigid temperatures. frozen out. this blast of winter is retreating. it will not be the balast. i'm krystal ball and that's the reality for those who can't afford heat unless there's a thaw on capitol hill. a winter tradition is back. the flu bug.
12:00 pm
i'm toure. it stayed away from this table which is a good reason to keep ari at a safe distance. >> here he is revealing blow by blow conversations, confidential conversations he had with the president and his other top national security advisers. these are some explosive statements that he has made about the president. this is not some outside critic. >> you have to take the full picture here, john. i would say on that matter, i think the american people expect that their commander in chief listen to all of his advisers, civilian and military, when it comes to discussion and debates about matters of war and peace and decisions that affect the lives of our men and women in uniform and that's how it should be. >> was gates wrong when heai


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on